1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to a process for the removal of organic pollutants from waste water. More particularly, this invention relates to a process for removal of such pollutants especially substituted and unsubstituted phenols by aerobic biodegration using a porous biomass support system in a fixed bed reactor.
2. Prior Art
One of the hallmarks of contemporary civilization is that each increment of technological progress almost invariably is accompanied by a similar increment of environmental regress. As the pace of technological advances quickens, so does the march of environmental deterioration. The realization of environmental damage has occurred only relatively recently, so that present society sometimes finds itself burdened with the accumulated sins of the not-too-distant past. But another hallmark of current society is its acceptance of the undesirability of environmental degradation coupled with a determination to minimize and even reverse it wherever possible. Although the return of ground waters to their pristine condition of an earlier era is not a realistic goal, there is a genuine determination to make our waters as pure as possible. Environmental agencies have set limits for many common industrial pollutants, and as methods of pollution reduction have become more successful in reducing or removing pollutants from waste water, environmental regulations have become more stringent, resulting in an ever tightening spiral whose goal is to reduce pollutants in waste water to that minimum which is technologically feasible.
Among the methods employed to reduce or remove pollutants, bioremediation constitutes an effective and highly desirable approach. Quite broadly, in bioremediation pollutants serve as a food source, generally as a source of carbon and/or nitrogen, for microorganisms. Bacterial metabolism converts the pollutants to metabolites generally with a simple chemical structure, sometimes degrading the pollutants completely to carbon dioxide and water in an aerobic process, or to methane in an anaerobic process. But in any event, the metabolites usually have no adverse environmental effects.
Various bioremediation processes are known. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,634,672 describes biologically active compositions for purifying waste water and air which comprises a polyurethane hydrogel containing (i) surface active coal having a specific surface according to BET of above 50 m.sup.2 /g, a polymer having cationic groups and cells having enzymatic activity and being capable of growth. U.S. Pat. No. 4,681,852 describes a process for biological purification of waste water and/or air by contacting the water or air with the biologically active composition of U.S. Pat. No. 4,634,672. The experimental examples of these patents indicate that the process is not effective for reducing contaminant concentrations in the effluent strain to less than 44 parts per million (ppm). This is not acceptable since the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in some instances has mandated that concentration for some contaminants (such as phenol) in the effluent stream must be as low as 20 parts-per-billion (ppb). (See Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Parts 414 and 416. Organic Chemicals and Plastics and Synthetic Fibers Category Effluent Limitations Guidelines, Pretreatment Standards, and New Source Performance Standards. Federal Register, Vol. 52, No. 214, Thursday, Nov. 5, 1989. Fules & Regulations, 42522.
Both U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,904,518 and 4,069,148 describe the addition of activated carbon or Fuller's earth to a suspension of biologically active solids (activated sludge) in waste water as an aid in phenol removal. The absorbents presumably act by preventing pollutants toxic to the bacteria from interfering with bacterial metabolic activity. The patentees' approach has matured into the so-called PACT process which has gained commercial acceptance despite its requisites of a long residence time, compious sludge formation with attendant sludge disposal problems, and the need to regenerate and replace spent carbon.
Rehm and coworkers have further refined the use of activated carbon in the aerobic oxidation of phenolic materials by using microorganisms immobilized on granular carbon as a porous biomass support system. Utilizing the propensity of microorganisms to grow on and remain attached to a surface, Rehm used a granular activated carbon support of high surface area (1300 m.sup.2 /g) to which cells attached within its macropores and on its surface, as a porous biomass support system in a loop reactor for phenol removal. H. M. Ehrhardt and H. J. Rehm, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 21, 32-6 (1985). The resulting "immobilized" cells exhibited phenol tolerance up to a level in the feed of about 15 g/L, whereas free cells showed a tolerance not more than 1.5 g/L. It was postulated that the activated carbon operated like a "buffer and depot" in protecting the immobilized microorganisms by absorbing toxic phenol concentrations and setting low quantities of the absorbed phenol free for gradual biodegradation. This work was somewhat refined using a mixed culture immobilized on activated carbon [A. Morsen and H. J. Rehm, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 26, 283-8 (1987)] where the investigators noted that a considerable amount of microorganisms had "grown out" into the aqueous medium, i.e., there was substantial sludge formation in their system.
Suidan and coworkers have done considerable research on the analogous anaerobic degradation of phenol using a a packed bed of microorganisms attached to granular carbon [Y. T. Wang, M. T. Suidan and B. E. Rittman, Journal Water Pollut. Control Fed., 58 227-33 (1986)]. For example, using granular activated carbon of 16.times.20 mesh as a support medium for microorganisms in an expanded bed configuration, and with feed containing from 358-1432 mg phenol/L, effluent phenol levels of about 0.06 mg/L (60 ppb) were obtained at a hydraulic residence time (HRT) of about 24 hours. Somewhat later, a beri-saddle-packed bed and expanded bed granular activated carbon anaerobic reactor in series were used to show a high conversion of COD to methane, virtually all of which occurred in the expanded bed reactor; P. Fox, M. T. Suidan, and J. T. Pfeffer, ibid., 60, 86-92, 1988. The refractory nature of ortho-cresols and meta-cresols toward degradation also was noted.
Givens and Sack, 42nd Purdue University Industrial Waste Conference Proceedings, pp. 93-102 (1987), performed an extensive evaluation of a carbon impregnated polyurethane foam as a microbial support system for the aerobic removal of pollutants, including phenol. Porous polyurethane foam internally impregnated with activated carbon and having microorganisms attached externally was used in an activated sludge reactor, analogous to the Captor and Linpor processes which differ only in the absence of foam-entrapped carbon. The process was attended by substantial sludge formation and without any beneficial effect of carbon.
The Captor process itself utilizes porous polyurethane foam pads to provide a large external surface for microbial growth in an aeration tank for biological waste water treatment. The work described above is the Captor process modified by the presence of carbon entrapped within the foam. A two-year pilot plant evaluation of the Captor process itself showed substantial sludge formation with significantly lower microbial density than had been claimed. J. A. Heidman, R. C. Brenner and H. J. Shah, J. of Environmental Engineering, 114, 1077-96 (1988). A point to be noted, as will be revisited below, is that the Captor process is essentially an aerated sludge reactor where the pads are retained in an aeration tank by screens in the effluent line. Excess sludge needs to be continually removed by removing a portion of the pade via a conveyor and passing the pads through pressure rollers to squeeze out the solids.
H. Bettmann and H. J. Rehm, Appl. Microbial. Biotechnol., 22, 389-393 (1985) have employed a fluidized bed bioreactor for the successful continuous aerobic degradation of phenol at a hydraulic residence time of about 15 hours using Pseudomonas putida entrapped in a polyacrylamide-hydrazide gel. The use of microorganisms entrapped within polyurethane foams in aerobic oxidation of phenol in shake flasks also has been reported; A. M. Anselmo et al., Biotechnology B.L., 7, 889-894 (1985).
Known bioremediation processes suffer from a number of inherent disadvantages. For example, a major result of increased use of such processes is an ever increasing quantity of sludge, which presents a serious disposal problem because of increasingly restrictive policies on dumping or spreading untreated sludge on land and at sea. G. Michael Alsop and Richard A. Conroy, "Improved Thermal Sludge Conditioning by Treatment With Acids and Bases", Journal WPCF, Vol. 54, No. 2 (1982), T. Calcutt and R. Frost, "Sludge Processing--Chances for Tomorrow", Journal of the Institute of Water Pollution Control, Vol. 86, No. 2 (1987) and "The Municipal Waste Landfill Crisis and A Response of New Technology", Prepared by United States Building Corporation, P.O. Box 49704, Los Angles, Calif. 90049 (Nov. 22, 1988). The cost of sludge disposal today may be several fold greater than the sum of other operating costs of waste water treatment.
Use of anaerobic sewage treatment systems has been offered as a solution to the sludge problem. William J. Jewell "Anaerobic Sewage Treatment", Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol. 21, No. 1 (1987). The largest difference between aerobic and anaerobic systems is in cellular yield. More than half of the substrate removal by aerobic systems can yield new microbial mass or sludge, the yield under anaerobic conditions is usually less that 15% of the organic substances removed. However, anaerobic systems are limited in the number of substrate that they can degrade or metabolize such as non-substituted aromatics (See N. S. Battersby & V. Wilson. "Survey of the anaerobic biodegradation Potential of Organic Chemicals in Digesting Sludge." Applied & Environmental Microbiology, 55(2):p. 433-439, February 1989. This is a significant disadvantage in that most industrial processes such as coke production and coal tar processing normally produce non-substituted aromatics as by-products (See J. M. Thomas, M. D. Lee, M. J. Scott and C. H. Ward, "Microbial Ecology of the Subsurface at an Abandoned Creosote Waste Site." Journal of Industrial Microbiology, Vol. 4, p. 109-120, 1989.
Another disadvantage inherent in some known bioremediation processes is that these processes do not reduce the levels of organic pollutants to reasonable levels [preferable less than about 0.1 parts per million (ppm)] at reasonable residence times (preferably less than about 24 hours). For example, in the process of U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,681,851 and 4,634,672 (See the specific examples), the concentration of phenol contaminants was not reduced below about 44 ppm.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,812,031 relates to the extraction of phenolic materials from aqueous solutions by means of polyurethane foam in the presence of hydrophilic fibers. The patent states that while polyurethane foams are relatively hydrophobic which can interfere with the interficial contact which is necessary to permit adsorption, the problem is overcome through the use of hydrophilic fibers which enable the materials to come into close and in intimate contact with the surfaces of the polyurethane to facilitate wetting thereof.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,617,531 relates to a method for the selective adsorption of phenol from hydrocarbon solutions. In this method, the solution is contacted with a polyurethane foam.